North Branford, Connecticut, police have arrested three men for allegedly stealing $1 million in cash from a man who hit the lottery more than 20 years ago.
Police say the North Branford resident kept his winnings in a home safe.
- Home
- Premium Memberships
- Lottery Results
- Forums
- Predictions
- Lottery Post Videos
- News
- Search Drawings
- Search Lottery Post
- Lottery Systems
- Lottery Charts
- Lottery Wheels
- Worldwide Jackpots
- Quick Picks
- On This Day in History
- Blogs
- Online Games
- Premium Features
- Contact Us
- Whitelist Lottery Post
- Rules
- Lottery Book Store
- Lottery Post Gift Shop
The time is now 6:06 am
You last visited
April 18, 2024, 6:06 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)
Three men charged with stealing $1M from lottery winner
Feb 27, 2008, 7:50 am (30 comments)
He kept a million dollars in a safe in his home?
I don't think I would keep that much money in my home unless I had excellent security.
Who needs enemies when you have family and friends......
Unfortunately, how very true.
"The money was apparently taken during two thefts in November but the victim, not identified by police, didn't notice the money was missing from his safe until Jan. 15."
How much money did he have in there!!
Grandsons and son inlaw? - WOW Why?????????? Cut from will?
If he had the mentality of basically sticking the money under the mattress....I'm seriously doubting he thought about writing a will. I sure hope he did and plans on taking them out of it.
Sad.
... and the media.
By keeping that money in his house, he should be charged with contributing to their downfall much like when you have an accident and are not wearing your seatbelt you can be charged.... that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of. Let him try in my neighborhood..Now that dummy will have to stay AWAKE wondering who is going to come after him now that they know he has the money IN HIS HOUSE!!!
And not to mention all the money he was losing by not investing it. Think of all that interest he could have been receiving! AUUGGHHH!
Yeah, That's why no one in my family will know if I can help it. Blind Trust. I will do something for them but in such small increments that it wouldn't raise suspicions. I will simply tell them that I won on a scratcher or something and let them ask for the
$5 or $10 k that I will gladly cough up in small pieces. My famliy woulDn't knock me in the head or anything But I will not have ANY peace.
TRY AND FIND ME!
I keep re-reading this to find the sarcasm, but I'm failing to see it. Surely you don't really think we should blame the victim? It seems like the last statistics said Nissans and Toyotas were the most-stolen cars in America. So when one gets stolen should we blame the owner for having it? Cuz if they'd been driving a Ford Pinto no way would it have been stolen. Or charge the rape victim with a crime because she was walking in "that" part of town? Pure nonsense!
I stopped re-reading and can validate that the persons *opinion* is narrow minded and lacking common sense.
Temptation to steal isnt any less prevalant whether the product is in sight or out of sight. It just makes it more challenging to get!
I can understand anyone wanting to keep their funds in close proximity. THe Bank industry only guarantees 250K of it be insured. So if they lose 750k of it from your account, ohh well, that interest compounding wont mean a thing. So the guy did the right thing by getting a safe. And the police are doing the right thing by taking the matter serious enough to charge the men.
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Nothing wrong with the guy retaining what is his money.
I was not really being sarcastic, I was being truthful. He kept his money in his house (which is his perogative even though I think it is stupid). So only the ones CLOSE to him (his relatives KNEW he had it consequently, they robbed him. He provided a "temptation" that they couldn't overcome. I am not saying that stealing is to be condoned at any time. I am just saying that he contributed to his own robbery. There used a thing called "common sense". Seems like to me it is in very short supply now.
Agreed - and had the safe booby-trapped.
wow 1,000,000 in safe at home a small bank dont keep that much there safe over night they let federal reserve lock it up.
I was about to contribute the same comment. And, it must be a pretty big safe.
litebets
If all the bank does is "lose 750k of it from your account" all you have to do is prove that you actually had the money in the account and you will be able to withdraw it, subject to the normal rules for the account. You don't have to pay for their accounting problems.
OTOH, if the bank fails, FDIC insurance will cover up to $100,000 for each depositor, or $250,000 for an IRA. Current banking regulations makes failure fairly unlikely, especially for large banks. I still wouldn't want my accounts to represent a portion of the bank's assets that didn't start with a few zeroes after the decimal point.
I think it's awfully stupid to keep that much cash on hand, especially when he obviously didn't have any need for it, but it is his choice. The article doesn't offer any clues on this specific situation, but I think it's phenomenally stupid to keep that much cash in a safe that can be easily opened without significant skill or work, or in one that can be carried away. If you can afford to keep that much cash laying around, you can afford a good safe.
"it must be a pretty big safe"
Just for fun: US currency is 2.61 inches wide by 6.14 inches long and 0.0043 inches thick. Multiply by 10,000 $100 bills and it's not quite 690 cubic inches. At 1728 CI per cubic foot, that's 0.4 CF. Figure the money came from a bank and is still fairly new and in neat bundles, allow for a bit of wasted space, and it will probably fit in a microwave. Maybe that's the problem. You can fit $1 million in a safe that's far to small for something that valuable.
If youre married, this is how you can structure your $1,000,000 to have it 100% FDIC insured at ONE bank.
Wife (Individual Checking & Savings)-$100,000
Husband (Individual Checking & Savings)-$100,000
Husband & Wife (Joint Checking & Savings)-$200,000
Husband (Individual IRA)-$250,000
Wife (Individual IRA)-$250,000
Husband & Wife (Living Trust with Benefactor)-$100,000
TOTAL: $1,000,000 (100% FDIC Coverage)
No worries on money he was losing.... he has more money where that came from. I wouldnt be surprised if he didnt disclose of other money he was keeping in there. The people who stole from him are total scum. They deserve to rot in jail but I wasnt really surprised that his son in law stole the money from him... I was shocked that his grandson stole from him though. I knew them years ago and feel bad for the victims. They definitely did not deserve this.
The GameGrl Writes: THe Bank industry only guarantees 250K of it be insured. So if they lose 750k of it from your account, ohh well, that interest compounding wont mean a thing. So the guy did the right thing by getting a safe.
Who told you this "fact?" Not true. You can keep $250,000 in a bank IRA, but otherwise that $250,000 limit is not mentioned anywhere on the FDIC web site or in their rules. People keep much more than that in banks.
Forgetting about all the entitlements ($100,000 for each beneficiary) that are covered by the FDIC (i.e., revocable trusts) any person can deposit up to $100,000 in any one bank as an individual account and be 100% insured. I could have up to $100,000 in as many banks as I want and be completely covered, so I don't know what you are talking about here. The only way anyone has ever lost money in a bank over the last 50+ years is if he/she exceeded that limit when it failed, used unqualified beneficiaries in a trust, or exceeded the FDIC limit, perhaps with accrued interest. Many people keep $1 million or more in banks. Losing $50,000 a year in interest just doesn't make sense. Then there are very safe investments like savings bonds purchased through the U.S. Treasury or Municipal Bonds that are tax exempt. The insurance companies that have been in business for 200 years that survived through the World Wars and the Great Depression and aren't going anywhere either, so a fixed annuity is very safe.
I won't go on to list the many safe investments, but keeping that kind of money in your home is really stupid. Maybe he watched too much TV where they show rich people with safes behind paintings on the wall.
That said, nobody should ever blame the victim for being an idiot. People leave keys in cars, but it doesn't mean someone should steal them. Still, there's a lot more going on here. Why would anyone keep that kind of cash in a safe? Anyway, I just wanted to correct your statement about the banking industry. I don't know what you do for a living, but it's not in finance. (No, I am not being a know-it-all. I know what I am saying from my work experience.)
You are partly correct. However, you can't just deposit $250,000 into an IRA at one time, that is, unless you roll it over from another investment. There are annual limits for qualified money.
Also, I am very sure you are wrong about the wife and husband having both $100,000 in individual accounts and joint accounts insured. Each can name the other ITF (in trust for) and any qualified beneficiaries (children, siblings) but not have separate savings/checking and ALSO joint accounts. Still, since the FDIC rules can become confusing it's best not to take a chance. If an individual has more than $100,000 or a couple has more than $200,000 the FDIC then considers all deposits, but that might take time. If I had lots of money, I wouldn't put it all in a bank anyway, especially now. But if that was my choice, then I'd just run around to several different banks or credit unions, which are also insured.
Keep in mind, that no matter what the FDIC says is safe, it's probably best not to keep any more than the $250,000 limit for an IRA (per social security number) and $100,000 (including all interest) in any one bank per person, although the huge banks like Bank of America, Chase, Wachovia, Citi, etc. are pretty safe anyway. Chances are your local bank that's been in town since 1890 isn't going anywhere either. Last year everyone panicked when the newspaper said Countrywide (a fairly new lending institution) was going under, and depositors lost money by cashing out CDs that had not yet matured, yet 6 months later, they're still in business. Even when another bank takes over, your deposits are still covered if the limits aren't met.
I believe Destined is correct about the individual and joint accounts, because FDIC insurance is for "each depositor" and "Bob Smith and Sue Smith" are a different depositor than "Bob Smith"or"Sue Smith". Destined is incorrect about insurance on trust accounts. For each owner there is 100k of insurance for each beneficiary. If a husband and wife have a trust account with 3 children as beneficiaries there is 600k of insurance coverage.
The explanations I've seen explain coverage for different categories, but I don't recall seeing info on multiple categories, so I may have misunderstood how the insurance applies in those situations. Checking with an advisor who is thoroughly familiar with the intricacies would be advisable for anyone with anything more than a simple situation.
FWIW, coverage is for each bank. Any depositor can have 100k of coverage at 100 different banks. Note that a different branch of "Security Savings" is still "Security Savings" and not a different bank.
Money market rates at big reputable banks are around 3-4% so youd be getting about $35,000 a year in interest. Rates are a lot lower than they were a year or two ago. If any of you monkeys ever hit the big one, invest in real estate! Make 10% a year in interest by owner financing homes. Its a buyers & landlords market right now with foreclosures at a record high obv. Id also get some 4-week Treasury Bills to have a monthly income coming in regularly.
Actually I was 100% right about both issues. I understand what youre saying about the trust and benefactors. However I was just showing how you could structure the money if you had $1,000,000 in cash. Technically the MAXIMUM protection in MY EXAMPLE would be $1,100,000 if you decided to add $100k extra to the trust. You are right though, if you had more kids you could get more coverage, but in my example I was assuming 1 kid/benefactor.
JustEx, normally I can agree with your detailed explanation. And I commend you for being accurate in what you state. My point was gleened over , so be it.. Thanks for seeing a difference in our views. I don't consider anyone *stupid* or having *stupid* actions by keeping money in their personal safe, no matter how little or much it is. The Point of a SAFE is to secure it. Ask any bank why they do it. Its no different. As to the poster who proclaimed that having such in their house was their own undoing , is ludricous! If a bank or a business carries CASH in their banks, then why can't a citizen do such and NOT be criticized for it. I am NOT saying that I would keep such in my household, but I certainly can have an open mind to understand those that keep rainy day funds close at hand. Even if that fund is 1 milllion. That is his business and he took the measures to place it in a secure device. That doesnt mean he should be partly to blame. Are banks to be blamed when they get robbed? Because that is the same thought pattern the one poster had.
"If a bank or a business carries CASH in their banks, then why can't a citizen do such and NOT be criticized for it."
The cash requirements of a business, and certainly a bank, are rather different from the requirements of the typical individual, even if that individual has won the lottery. What kind of rainy day do you envision where having a million dollars makes some kind of sense? That it apparenty took the vistim at least 6 weeks to notice that the money was missing says something about his need to have cash on hand.
"Are banks to be blamed when they get robbed? Because that is the same thought pattern the one poster had."
Banks have to keep cash on hand, and that's why people rob them. Unless you believe the victim took precautions that are somehow comparable to a bank's precautions the thought process of the poster definitely isn't the same. Blaming the victim isn't right, but this victim appears to have made himself a very inviting target. I agree completely that he has the right to do so, but I'm certainly curious if he did it with deliberate knowledge, or through stupidity.
This is way off the topic about the man who put money under his mattress, but I want to answer KY Floyd and Destined.
It's been a while since I've studied the FDIC rules. I just checked the joint coverage section and it's either changed or it's a different video. I'm not trying make excuses, but I was pretty sure they said both joint & individual accounts cannot be combined for coverage. However, now they are saying the joint account is separate. So Destined is correct about that, and I apologize, but I still wouldn't want to keep up with all the changes. The bottom line is what would happen if a bank ever failed and how easy would it be to get your money.
Well, hopefully someday I'll need to worry about all this money! LOL
Edit: I take back my apology. I just read Destined's other comment. Anyone who says "you monkeys" to express his so-called expertise isn't worth answering.
BTW, I know a lot of landlords who have several empty units and are stuck with mortgages and high tax bills & rising property insurance. The ones who own the properties still need to cover taxes, insurance and maintenance. My neighbor finally hired a real estate agent and the home has been empty since October.
GameGrl, I didn't skip over your point. I respect what you are saying. I don't like it when people tell me how to run my life either.
I was only saying that I'm guessing the million dollars was not insured. It is insured in a bank. (not a safe deposit box) That's all. If a bank is robbed, the bank will replace your money. It's 4:30 in the morning. If I went outside and took a walk to 7-11, it would probably be foolish. I used to take walks at night all the time, but I was told it's not safe. That still doesn't mean someone has the right to assault me. Still, we all need to use a little common sense once in a while.
But then again, How do you keep a large Lottery win a secret?
1. The retailer who sold you the winning ticket is probably going to do some research to try and identify you. Your probably on camera when you purchased a ticket.
2. Cashing in your winning ticket at lottery headquarters. There is another group of interested observers. Lottery security will probably do a detailed background check of some sort to see if your eligible for the payout. Lottery marketing people will be interested in posting your picture everywhere too.
3. Oops, you mentioned a trust. You probably had to hire an attorney. Boy, if you ever wanted to keep anything a secret, just hire a "trust"ing attorney. There is no such thing!!
4. You got to keep the money somewhere . . . hopefully in a Federal bank. One of the more not so secretive institutions around.
Hmmm, I wonder if any of your distant or not so distant relatives work at any of these places.
Good luck trying to keep it a secret!! Once somebody knows you got it, they will scheme ways to get it from you - legally or illegally!
Good Luck!
LottoL